Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

We would like to make a correction to a part of appendix "The result of
the nuclide analysis of water in the trench of Unit 1 Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Station" of "The status of water analysis in the trench of
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station" announced on 30th March. We
apologize for any inconvenience and would like to correct as follows:

Is that a bad thing or a good thing? After reading the wiki's I have no idea.

It is just another false alarm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

That's ironic coming from you

In comparison :

PS3

XBOX

And because PS3 is a bad-tempered tsundere, using her may result in one being cut into pieces by a Savage Wolf Fury. Thus they chose the XBox.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Is that a bad thing or a good thing? After reading the wiki's I have no idea.

Well... technically its not a bad or good thing, the correction does not change the danger prognosis much, what would have been more concerning are major mistakes in the caesium and iodine measurements.

I believe this was just a result of hurried data aquisition (maybe stress). So unless they blunder things on a regular basis and are therefore not fit to operate a nuclear power plant (very unlikely), I would say the correction poses no significant reason for concern.

Now the data... this water should have an equivalence dose of approx. 20mSv/h (this is based on a hasty rough calculation - I could be wrong).

Its not exceptionaly high for the inside of the reactor housing (and I hope it is not leaking).
The Cs 137 will remain on a rather stable level, and the other isotopes will decay more quickly (assuming that no new radioactive isotopes leak into the water). Well, if they can keep this stuff inside the reactor housing it should not pose a serious risk for people outside the power plant (though I have the feeling they will not be able to prevent partial leaking of the stuff - basically its now an open-air cooling cycle).

Tokyo Electric Co. came under further fire Friday after it was revealed that many of its employees at the damaged Fukushima No. 1 power plant have been working without the protection of dosimeters. It also said radioactivity in groundwater under the compound spiked.

All the flipflop published measurements of water, beef, plants, etc... has me thinking they aren't doing their statistical sampling protocols --- aka they're just freaking out. Also.. the number of times they've screwed up the "order of magnitude" in announcements.... its like we have "idiot-bureaucrats-who-got-appointed-cuz-their-daddy-was-someone" in between the working technocrats and the public.

EDIT:
I have to thank Vexx for contributing to the thread more of the humanitarian crisis of this disaster in his posts, rather than turning amatuer nuclear scientist and speculating which I can't see has contriubuted much in the long run in terms of info at present :\
I heard that they wanna expand the evacuation zone but I understand the relunctance. Where the hell you gonna house, clothe and feed the refugees if you want more to leave?

Tens, especially the elderly have already passed away simply from lack of food, water or the extreme cold temperatures, it's kinda a lose/lose situation at present.
Another video clip about those who are waiting to go back home though and their current situation:

@ Mystique : The reason why "amateur nuclear scientists" are around trying to discuss something is due to the fact that "expert panels" provided by TEPCO are nothing more than a bunch of bureaucrats shoving nonsense to news crews to pacify them, instead of providing real scientists who provide facts in real science and mathematics. Sure the latter may be provide nothing tantalising in their answers, but it would certainly be more real than the "site data" provided that are taken with little or no planning and objectivity.

After three weeks, operators of the plant are no closer to regaining control of damaged reactors, as fuel rods remain overheated and high levels of radiation flow into the sea.

There! Another bit of misreporting. I love how news crews sensationalise every single thing they report on just to sell the ads in their ad space. The radiation doesn't "flow" into the sea, what do they think it is, a chemical dump?

I wish they open the job up to foreign diploma graduates. I seriously don't mind doing the job.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

There! Another bit of misreporting. I love how news crews sensationalise every single thing they report on just to sell the ads in their ad space. The radiation doesn't "flow" into the sea, what do they think it is, a chemical dump?

This isn't misreporting or sensationalism. They've spent the entire previous page establishing what the context of "flow" is. If anything, it's an editing mistake.

This isn't misreporting or sensationalism. They've spent the entire previous page establishing what the context of "flow" is. If anything, it's an editing mistake.

however, "high levels of radiation" has no context.... it would have been more useful to use terms people understand (and a lot less sensational). How many dental x-rays exposure, for example.
(googling was no help... all it showed was that literally dozens of reporters had copied from each other across the planet ... right down to the sentences in some cases. No one bothered to find out what the "legal limit" was in the first place).

Quote:

Originally Posted by randomly selected article, they were almost all nearly identical

the level of radioactive iodine which was detected in the sea had reached 4385 times higher than legal limit.

Scary, eh? Except that the number really doesn't tell the average reader much.

Fortunately. the half life of radioactive iodine is only 8.02 days.... almost no report mentions that either.

Here's an EPA note about the levels detected in Washington state:

Quote:

Results from a screening sample taken March 25 from Spokane, Wash. detected 0.8 pCi/L of iodine-131, which is more than 5,000 times lower than the Derived Intervention Level set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

See? In this EPA announcement the actual physical reading was provided. (note: pCi/L = Picocuries Per Liter.... "pico" means 10**-12 or 0.000000000001, but keep in mind a Curie is a damn big wad of radiation)

That's what had the XKCD guy annoyed enough to produce that chart I keep quoting -- lack of context contributes to *irrational* fear rather than *informed rational* wariness.
---------------------------------------
In actual regular news about the immediate problems people are facing in Japan, or in analysis of the tsunami:Seawall gave false sense of security to one town...

however, "high levels of radiation" has no context.... it would have been more useful to use terms people understand (and a lot less sensational). How many dental x-rays exposure, for example.

No, I regard such a comparison as scam, because it is based on the assumption, that the dose that is measured in an hour is equivalent to a one time incident. If you have absorbed radioactive isotopes, and if these isotopes concentrate in certain organs of the body, they can radiate for much longer than an hour. And the energy density will be more punctual than in an x-ray scan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

(googling was no help... all it showed was that literally dozens of reporters had copied from each other across the planet ... right down to the sentences in some cases. No one bothered to find out what the "legal limit" was in the first place).

google news allows to filter out duplicates (though the feature isn't fool proof, as you already mentioned small changes to the article make it unique enough for the google algorithm to not sort it out).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

Scary, eh? Except that the number really doesn't tell the average reader much.

What I find really astonishing is that it is just iodine 131, there should be other isotopes too... on the other side, if there was the same amount of iodine 131 and Cs137 the iodine would radiate in orders of magnitudes more because of the short half life (maybe they simply cannot detect other energy spectrums when the iodine radiates so heavily). The iodine will radiate in 8 days what the same amount of caesium radiates in 30 years (when strictly talking about BQ... the equivalence dose is another thing and requires the consideration of the decay energy).

Anyway you are right Vexx, it is hard to qualify such a statement without knowing at least the reference value (how much is legal?) and the measured value.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

Fortunately. the half life of radioactive iodine is only 8.02 days.... almost no report mentions that either.

On the other side almost no report mentions, that you should multiply the given Sv/h dose (if one is given - they often simply give the dose in Sv, which I think could be just a mistake or they really calculated the final Sv value, what I'ld doubt) x24x8x2 (for iodine 131) if you want to know how much radiation will be set free inside you should you consume the given amount of iodine 131 (but often they even lack to tell you the amount of water/food whatever, so you have to guess that... most likely it is 1kg but who knows).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

Here's an EPA note about the levels detected in Washington state:
See? In this EPA announcement the actual physical reading was provided. (note: pCi/L = Picocuries Per Liter.... "pico" means 10**-12 or 0.000000000001, but keep in mind a Curie is a damn big wad of radiation)

And I thought its common to use BQ these days exactly for that reason... Curie being a too big wad of radiation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vexx

That's what had the XKCD guy annoyed enough to produce that chart I keep quoting -- lack of context contributes to *irrational* fear rather than *informed rational* wariness.

But it is not ideal either. Actually I thought about it, and came to the conclusion that it is very hard to explain this correctly because it is a complex matter and there is not much room for simplification without makeing the explanation completely useless. There are many things to consider, I think the most difficult part is to explain how different isotopes interact with an organism.

If anyone can update already to the 50 people who are sacrificing themselves into Fukushima Power Plant. Really am hoping they're will get the best treatment every day.

-There are more than 50 people now.
-They were really badly equipped by TEPCO to handle the situation.
-They aren't really sacrificing themselves 100%. Most of them will probably die natural deaths. They are still putting them up to very dangerous risks though.

Since Vexx brought it up. Will Japan keep relying on seawalls? I assume they are rather effective except in really really bad situations like this one. To everyone who lives in Japan, have seawalls ever provided a sense of security and has that sense of security been affected by the recent events?